1.  More and more state legislatures are enacting mandatory seatbelt laws for drivers of automobiles. Many of the statutes state that if an occupant of the car (driver or otherwise) is not wearing a seatbelt at the time of an automobile accident, then that occupant may not recover civil damages from the party who caused or created the accident. What public policy reason would be behind such a law? Would this law be effective and achieve its goal to any degree?

2.  Modern legal theorists are now discussing the wisdom of including sex or gender as one of the protected, or even suspect, classes. Their argument is essentially this: why do we define as a protected class persons who constitute approximately 50% of the population? Whether male or female, to include either is simply to say 50% of the population is within the protected class and the remaining 50% is not. Has American society evolved to the point that we should no longer consider someone's gender a potential handicap in the job market?

3.  It is becoming increasingly more common for attorneys to use video wills in conjunction with written wills. In the video will, the testator (one who makes a will) is seen discussing the contents of the will and why certain choices were made by the testator. Further, it is also becoming more common for a medical doctor or psychologist to also appear in the video with the testator to state that he/she has found the testator to be of sound mind and body. Finally, the video usually shows the testator signing the will along with the signing of the witnesses. Is all of this fuss necessary? What circumstances have caused this to become more common? Finally, is this a good idea or not?

4.  Federal student loans are non-exempt debt. That is to say, a federal student loan may not be discharged in bankruptcy court except for the most extreme hardships. Is there any reason why a federal court should treat a student loan any differently than any other debt?